Rise of the Argonauts Comments by Tom Bramwell

I find the your knee-jerk reaction that doesn't fit this thread at all, but looks like it was copypasted from the Killzone 2 thread, a good laugh of the day, too, though. :p

It's not really that knee-jerk, though. And I don't do copy-paste. And I'm probably not buying Killzone 2.

I generally agree with EG's scores. So what if they gave this a 3? At best it would've got a 5, and even getting that score there are more and better games I can buy for the same price.

The reason for my reaction is that every time EG give a game a low score people start saying "I've played this, it's worth at least a 7". For more proof, see Crash Time on the Xbox360.

I did read the review and my comments are not just based on the 3/10 score.
EG reviewers are more and more like Edge reviewers every day - WANK.
Pretentious, up their own-arse and sensationalist in their scores.

This review ends with basically telling you the end of the game which is the action of a TWAT.
Then the 3/10 score just to be a cunt.

It's a mediocre game at best but to spoil the end is attrociously bad journalism. I bet he was dry wanking while crying when he wrote this

You come across as incredibly bitter, scimitarDT. Do you happen to work for Codemasters or Liquid Entertainment perchance? Of course I'm sure you're well aware that you're quite welcome to fuck off at any time if you dislike the site so much.

@ UncleLou

Not much bitching, is there?

Are you sure you are reading the same comments section as myself, or perhaps you have a lot of people on ignore?

I wouldn't have commented about the bitching if there wasn't any now would I?

Hahahah! No I don't work for either.

i just hate CUNTS, and you sir are a massive TWATTING CUNT as well.

Bye!

Jesus who writes a review like this...

"For an action RPG elevated beyond its serviceable components by the allure of rich mythology to end in such a desperate contradiction is comprehensively self-destructive."

This is some of the most pretentious "journalism" I've read in quite some time.

Bramwell has spent too long in the cafe wearing a black turtleneck with Gillen and Whitehead, I think. Or he missed his vaccination against New Games Journalism.

@ Ajcandw

What? Because he uses words of more than one syllable? I'll translate for you:

'It could have been good but this game stinks.'

That better? ;-)

@ UncleLou

Not much bitching, is there?

Are you sure you are reading the same comments section as myself, or perhaps you have a lot of people on ignore?

I wouldn't have commented about the bitching if there wasn't any now would I?


Just scanned the first page, I see two posts (of 50) that would qualify as "bitching". Sounded to me like you were painting everyone disgareeing with the same brush. Combined with the slightly patronising "read the review" - with which to disagree isn't that easy, because it's pretty much on the money. It's the conclusion, though - the score - people disagree with.

I wouldn't have commented about the bitching about the bitching if there was that much, would? ;)

Jesus who writes a review like this...

"For an action RPG elevated beyond its serviceable components by the allure of rich mythology to end in such a desperate contradiction is comprehensively self-destructive."

This is some of the most pretentious "journalism" I've read in quite some time.

play the game (if you can be bothered with playing this crap). you'll see the review is spot on. i bought this on launch day back in december, and the 3/10 is a perfectly justified score. and mentioning the end is perfectly fair, as it really is one of the worst ever.

would you have preferred it if the reviewer had not mentioned that the end is absolute bollocks? and believe me, if you've ever read any greek mythology (ffs, even if you watched that crappy kevin sorbo hercules series) you're in for a shocker

To be honest, if i was bothering my arse to play the game and then found out the end - good OR bad- I'd be pissed.
It's just one of those things you don't do. It's a review of a game. What about if you say an end to a game is so fucking amazing that you have to tell everyone what it is? Would that mean it is wrong to do that? But it's okay to tell someone a shitty end?
It's plain wrong no matter how you look at it.

The game may be shite, but lately EG has got on my cock. 10/10 for every game thats half decent (fable 2 = 10/10 - go fuck yerself, they can't even do a decent job of co-op on that game, and the 'immersion' is about as in depth as having a shit in a field)

i dunno, I just think - no actually i KNOW that a fair few journalists are paid off for good reviews (I've personally witnessed such 'transactions') and while it's not the norm it does happen. I don't normally post anything about anything as I can't be arsed but in the face of such shoddy wank i had to say something, even though I thought the game was sub-par

scimitarDT:
I actually agree with you about what EG has become, but your language is just horrible.
Do you expect anyone to take you seriously, writing like that?

"..sensationalist in their scores" is probably the best way to describe EG those days, but please, atleast try to be the better person and dont fall to being just sensational yourself.

Sensationalist, wut? This is a pretty unhyped game, s'not like every gamer browsing the web will go "WTF SUCH LOW SCORE GOGOGO TO REVIEW" over it.

I think the review reads well enough and has enough motivation for it's score on the accounts of "boring game".

Quickedit: OTOH, I feel that most other game sites give way too bland scores, even giving bland shit scores in the 60-75 range just for working. Games are more than the sum of their parts, most often less, sometimes more. Not to say there aren't slip-ups on this site, a recent one would be Fallout 3 but I'll not even start on that one.

Quickedit the twoed: Point is, I've never thought of EG:s reviews as sensationalist in the slightest idea.

Slowedit the thirded: And believe you me, I have a huge penis.

I think saying a game that is 60 - 75% in a review is a 'dull' review is a bit daft to be honest. if a game is above average and has elements that fans of a genre would appreciate, but as a whole the game is flawed in a few ways then a score of 60 - 75 would represent that adequately. In trying not to be 'dull' should they lower the score to 3/10 to represent the reviewers dissapointment that the game is not what it should be? or perhaps elevate the score to 7 or 8 to appeal to the fans of that genre and say 'hey in your world of interests - this is pretty ok and you may enjoy it'. There is room for any score if the guidelines are clear on what that score means - which they aren't on a constantly changing site.

This is what I mean, when it comes to reading scores - people these days have to make a statement. A 10/10 implies perfection, which we all know is not achievable. If it doesn't then what does it represent? If the score means nothing then why have it? because we all need to be able to compare the score to other games so we get something to judge a game by? No, because unless they are all by the same reviewer who happens to be such an impartial person who loves every genre equally - then it won't work.

Sweet jesus. And i was looking forward to this. . .
Wonder if they will ever port Titan Quest to the 360 or PS3

@scimitar, which are all reasons to skip the scoring system alltogether and let the texts speak for themselves. That's not going to happen though, is it?

What I don't want a reviewer to do is play a game that he thinks is bad and then extrapolate the score to something else just because "some, or even the majority of, action gamers might like it but not me", that's just crazytalk - the score should be as personal as can be, unless extraordinary circumstances arise. This game does not seem that extraordinary since most gamers are somewhat versed in the action rpg genre.

And of course I'm not saying a 60-75 game should be reviewed as anything else, but they shouldn't be put there just because it has average gameplay elements but if it on the whole deserves it. Most games that just does something right seem to end up there even though most players (incl. the reviewer of course) would not want to play them on the whole, because they are boring.

peak_performance:
You seem like a douche, but I wouldnt mind your huge penis. Sometimes you just want MEAT.

FFS!!!

Yet another game that I was looking forward to for my 360 that turns out to be utter shite ...

Honestly, I get to play only one game per year on my 360, if I'm lucky - OK my tastes are somewhat restricted but FFS, the only games getting 8+/10 are fucking shooters and Bethesda's output.

Elder Scrolls V in 2010 for my next game then by the looks of it ...

*yawn*

3/10 is a piss take, it's a lot better than this! A definate 6/10 based on the review!

"so eg is biased if they give a high score and biased if they give a low score?
anyone who thinks eg has an agenda is a muppet. "

They do seem to give out an unusually large number of scores of 4 or less (which means 'unplayable' IMO) and a ridiculous number of 9+ scores (like Fable II FFS).

Wait, did this just get a 3 instead of what, from the review, sounds much more like at LEAST a five because... the reviewer didn't like the ending? Errr, ok.

Edit: Reading through the comments, I have to agree that EG scores seem to be very "LOOK AT ME!" Which is odd, as the text itself is generally pretty solid, except for an upsetting frequency of "HEY LOOK WE HAVE A GIRL THAT WORKS HERE" and "AREN'T WE SO BRITISH TEE HEE" jokes. I generally come to EG first for my reviews, but the description of their scores as "sensationalist" seems to fit pretty well.

@ UncleLou

Before my initial comment Krelle, FenderMaster, darm, Buztafen, ZuluHero, scimitarDT & Starkillah_79 all bitch purely about the score without mentioning much else.

So I count 7 score bitching comments. I personally think it's time to abandon scores altogether. They serve no purpose other than to initiate knee jerk comments.

"So I count 7 score bitching comments. I personally think it's time to abandon scores altogether. They serve no purpose other than to initiate knee jerk comments. "

And extra hits ...

Oh come on, extra hits for this game of all? Have some sense, people.

The game isnt that bad. Probably worth a 5. Eitherway, after the Eurogamer 'lets lick EAs arse' Spore review, I never trust a review on here again

Before my initial comment Krelle, FenderMaster, darm, Buztafen, ZuluHero, scimitarDT & Starkillah_79 all bitch purely about the score without mentioning much else.



Exactly what I meant. Two comments that would qualify as "bitching", the others are politely disagreeing, making a few points why - which is exactly what the comments are for. That they don't all wrote an essay doesn't really matter.

So I count 7 score bitching comments. I personally think it's time to abandon scores altogether. They serve no purpose other than to initiate knee jerk comments.


Most people can cope with scores pretty well. Regardign "knee jerk", well, my point stands.

Wait, did this just get a 3 instead of what, from the review, sounds much more like at LEAST a five because... the reviewer didn't like the ending? Errr, ok.

Why is that a problem? If games are to have stories - and, in the case of a game like Rise of the Argonauts, a story that is central to the gameplay experience - then why shouldn't they be marked up or down depending on how well those stories are told, how satisfying they're concluded? A review of a narrative game shouldn't just be a question of grading its technical merits. Criticism of every other artform - books, film, music etc - places greater value on the creative element rather than mere technical adequacy, and I don't see why games should be any different.

I really don't understand the persistent assumption that it's somehow pretentious to judge games as more than just abstract lumps of pixels that you can move around.

3/10?

The actual copy of the review was leading to something more along the lines of 6/10 or 7/10 I thought. There really wasn't much in the way of negativity, apart from 60% of the review moaning about the lack of real choice but since when is real choice something that we get in games?

To justify a 3/10 I'd have expected a lot more information on what exactly is really bad about the game.

I thought that the reason A lot of games get hyped and score high is because the game is actually good? Just me?

@ UncleLou
Exactly what I meant. Two comments that would qualify as "bitching", the others are politely disagreeing, making a few points why - which is exactly what the comments are for.

I agree, that is what comments are for, and if it were true in this case then I wouldn't have commented. It's not though and I'm not the only person to say so.

The review actually amde it sounds interesting in parts. Wasn't expecting 3 out of 10. But then I agree that the range of scores different games get on Eurogamer is somewhat confusing. But then that is what you get when lots of different people review the games. Still, fairly bemused that the absolute travesty that was Fable 2's story didn't get a mauling like this. Or in fact that the combat that was one button mashing or any of the other dire aspects of that game.

The fact of the matter is that the scoring system on Eurogamer is somewhat odd. I've come to accept that and don;t really care what the final number is. The reviews are ususally well written and I often find the number at the end only confuses the issue.

However, I will still never forget Gears 1 and halo getting 8's. Not because I think they are worth 10/10 but because of all the other games they have given 8/10 that are definitely not just as good as them.

Mirror's Edge?
Track Mani DS?
Lego Batman!?!?!

All 8's.

Anyway the point is that there is no consistency.

"Anyway the point is that there is no consistency"

Seems like mainly Dan and Tom scores with the EG "norm" in mind, while everyone else still score as if 7 was the medium.
If EG could just try to confuse their readers less, theyd be back on the road of win ano EG 2005-ish

@jstar:

How can you even say that?

Trackmania DS is one of the finest racing games ever devised, on one of the finest consoles ever devised.
Gears of War has some of the worst AI ever devised, coupled with Epic's truly stunning lack of post-release support. At least the graphics are nice.
Halo was a technical showcase for the Xbox, further iterations have got progressively worse.

If anything, Trackmania is easily the best of the three. It's more fun, lasts longer, and you can play it on the toilet.

EG put more people off shocker by clearly scoring a title way too low.

Well. having just completed this game Rise of the Argonauts on 360 after approx 17 hours, I can say it was very entertaining.
In no way did it deserve a 3/10. That once again, is EG and it's reviewers being total tossers. This game makes an easy 7/10 and if you like a game with a STORY, and like the STORY well told, with lots of violent combat in between then its a good-un.

Recommended to all RPG fans with a brain cell. Graphics are perfectly fine ( not GOW 2 standard ) but not that far from it either.
Gameplay is fun and the story is ages old and is told well. Yes there is lots of talking in the game. Did I mention...it's got a story ?

EG, I keep coming back just to slate you off, you and Edge magazine really are the suckiest games reviewing organisations this side of something sucky.

I'll be back to bemoan the poor quality reviews and inaccurate opinions in the near future.